honour, to consecrate the eucharist. Polycarp is stated, during this visit to Rome, to have brought back to the church many heretics, who had embraced the tenets of Valentinus and Marcion: and Irenæus informs us, that meeting one day with Marcion himself, who said to him, "Do you recognise me?" he replied, "I recognise the firstborn of Satan." The martyrdom of Polycarp took place in the amphitheatre of Smyrna, in the presence of the proconsul: and a most interesting account of it was written by the Christians in that city, and sent to the other churches. Eusebius has preserved part of this letter in his Ecclesiastical History, (IV. 15,) and the whole of it was published by archbishop Usher in 1647. We have the authority of Irenæus for the fact of Polycarp having written many epistles but only one genuine work of this kind has come down to us, which was addressed to the Christians at Philippi. It was published for the first time in Latin by J. Faber Stapulensis in 1498, and in Greek by Peter Halloix in the first volume of his Lives of Oriental Writers, p. 525, in 1633. A fuller and more perfect copy of it was printed by archbishop Usher in 1644. 3. Epistola Ecclesia Smyrnensis de Martyrio Polycarpi. The testimony, which I adduce from the words of Polycarp, is not taken from his Epistle to the Philippians, but from the circular Epistle, which was written, as just stated, by the church at Smyrna: and I adduce it, as enabling me to say a few words concerning the form of the ancient doxologies. The holy martyr, when he was fastened to the stake, and was about to surrender his soul to the Master, whom he had faithfully served so many years, addressed Him in a solemn and affecting prayer, the last words of which were, "For this “and for every thing I praise thee, I bless thee, I 66 66 glorify thee, together with the eternal and heavenly Jesus Christ, thy beloved Son, with whom "to thee and the Holy Ghost be glory, both now "and for evermore. Amen k." 66 Such are the concluding words of the prayer in the edition of archbishop Usher: but Eusebius has quoted them differently, "I glorify thee, through "the eternal High Priest Jesus Christ, thy beloved "Son, through whom be glory to thee with him "in the Holy Ghost, both now and for evermore. "Amen." The difference between these two forms of expression appears considerable, and is connected in some measure with the Arian controversy: for it is well known, that the Arians, if they would have used the former doxology at all, would have greatly preferred the latter: and Usher seems to hint, that the genuine words of Polycarp may have been altered by a favourer of Arianism. The first of the two forms unites the Son and the Holy Ghost with the Father, and ascribes equal glory to all the three persons: the second seems to place the Father above the two other persons, and by expressions which are not very distinct and intelligible, to glorify the Father through the Son and in the Holy Ghost. It was remarked so long ago as by Socrates in the * Διὰ τοῦτο καὶ περὶ πάντων αἰνῶ σε, εὐλογῶ σε, δοξάζω σε, σὺν τῷ αἰωνίῳ καὶ ἐπουρανίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, ἀγαπητῷ σου παιδί, μεθ ̓ οὗ σοι καὶ Πνεύματι Αγίῳ ἡ δόξα, καὶ νῦν καὶ εἰς τοὺς μέλλοντας αἰῶνας. Αμήν. 1 Διὰ τοῦ αἰωνίου ἀρχιερέως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ ἀγαπητοῦ σου παιδός· δι ̓ οὗ σοι σὺν αὐτῷ ἐν Πνεύματι ̔Αγίῳ δόξα, καὶ νῦν καὶ εἰς τοὺς μέλλοντας αἰῶνας. p. 169. fifth century, that one of the grounds for charging Eusebius with Arianism was taken from his using the phrase through Christ in his doxologies: and that such was his practice, may be seen in some of his works now extant". It is added however by Socrates, that the phrase was often used by orthodox writers and bishop Bull observes, that the words μeo and do, with whom and through whom, occur in doxologies written before the council of Nice o. "The early orthodox writers,” as bishop Bull goes on to remark, "while they glorified "the Father through the Son, intended to express "the subordination of the Son, in his relation of "Son, and the preeminence of the Father, in his "relation of Father: but by adoring the Son toge"ther with the Father, they intended to express his 66 66 being of one substance and his existing in the same divine essence and nature with the Father." Basil also defends the expression, through the Son, in the Holy Ghost, as bearing an orthodox sense?: and it may be stated generally, that both forms were used indifferently before the council of Nice; but the Arians after that time made a distinction, and glorified the Father, not together with, but through the Son. Theodoret informs us, that in the middle of the fourth century the clergy and people of Antioch were divided, some using the conjunction and, when they glorified the Son, (i. e. saying and to the in Hist. Eccles. II. 21. p. 105. n See the last words of his Panegyrical Oration in Hist. Eccles. X. 4. p. 480. • Def. Fid. Nic. II. 3. 6. Justin Martyr says, εὐλογοῦμεν τὸν ποιητὴν τῶν πάντων διὰ τοῦ Υἱοῦ αὐτ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ διὰ Πνεύ ματος τοῦ ̔Αγίου. Apol. I. 67. p. 83. Irenæus observes, "in "Deo omnipotente per Jesum "Christum offert ecclesia." IV. 17, 6. p. 249. P De Sp. Sancto, c. I. in fin. 66 66 66 Son,) and others applying the preposition through to the Son, and in to the Holy Ghost 9. This was the period, when the dispute concerning the form of doxology became general: and Philostorgius, the Arian historian, is speaking of the same time and place, when he says, "that Flavianus was the first person who used the words, Glory to the Father "and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost: for be"fore his time some had said, Glory to the Father through the Son in the Holy Ghost, which was "the expression in most general use; and others, Glory to the Father in the Son and Holy GhostTM.” Nicephorus supplies us with still another form, Glory to the Father and to the Son in the Holy Ghosts; which was probably adopted by those who wished to lower the divinity of the third person in the Trinity. Philostorgius is undoubtedly wrong, when he says, that Flavianus was the inventor of the first of these forms, Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost. In the passage, which I shall quote at length from Clement of Alexandria, in No. 20, thanks are offered "to the Father and to "the Son with the Holy Ghost:" Hippolytus also says, after speaking of the Son, "to him be glory "and power with the Father and Holy Ghost in "the holy church both now and for evert." Dionysius of Alexandria concludes one of his works with the following words, "To God the Father, and to "the Son our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Holy "Ghost, be glory and power for ever and ever";" ¶ Hist. Eccles. II. 24. p. 106. r III. 13. p. 495-6. s Hist. Eccles. IX. 24. p. 737. t Αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος ἅμα Πατρὶ καὶ ̔Αγίῳ Πνεύματι, ἐν τῇ ἁγίᾳ ἐκκλησίᾳ καὶ νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ καὶ « Τῷ δὲ Θεῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ Υἱῷ τῷ Κυρίῳ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, σὺν τῷ having prefaced this doxology by saying, "I con"clude what I have now written to you, in accord"ance with all this, and having received the form "and rule from the old persons who have preceded "us, and expressing my thankfulness in words "which agree with theirs." But a form of equal force, as implying the equality of the three persons, had been used much earlier by Polycarp, where the phrase μe of, with whom, can only imply, that equal or the same glory was to be ascribed to the Son as to the Father and the Holy Ghost. Basil, in the treatise already quoted, expressly says, that “the "church recognises both forms, and rejects neither "of them, as destructive of the other-The form, "with whom, is proper when we are ascribing glory; "the form, through whom, when we are giving "thanks. But it is false, that the phrase, with 66 66 whom, is foreign from the practice of persons of piety; for as many as are led by steadiness of "character to prefer a venerable antiquity to no 66 velty, and have preserved the uncorrupted tradition of the fathers in different countries and cities, "make use of this phrase y." And in another place he speaks of the received doxology as one, "which "has come to us from the fathers, which we find 66 continuing by an undesigned uniformity of custom "in those churches which are uncorrupted "." He afterwards speaks more in detail of the early writers, who had used the doxology, to the Father and the Son, or, to the Father with the Son. He names Irenæus, Clement of Rome, Dionysius of Rome, ̔Αγίῳ Πνεύματι, δόξα καὶ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. Οp. p. 100. Apud Basil. de Sp. S. c. 29. × Cap. 29. y De Spir. S. c. 7. |